Literature DB >> 31400529

Untangling featural and conceptual object representations.

Tijl Grootswagers1, Amanda K Robinson2, Sophia M Shatek3, Thomas A Carlson3.   

Abstract

How are visual inputs transformed into conceptual representations by the human visual system? The contents of human perception, such as objects presented on a visual display, can reliably be decoded from voxel activation patterns in fMRI, and in evoked sensor activations in MEG and EEG. A prevailing question is the extent to which brain activation associated with object categories is due to statistical regularities of visual features within object categories. Here, we assessed the contribution of mid-level features to conceptual category decoding using EEG and a novel fast periodic decoding paradigm. Our study used a stimulus set consisting of intact objects from the animate (e.g., fish) and inanimate categories (e.g., chair) and scrambled versions of the same objects that were unrecognizable and preserved their visual features (Long et al., 2018). By presenting the images at different periodic rates, we biased processing to different levels of the visual hierarchy. We found that scrambled objects and their intact counterparts elicited similar patterns of activation, which could be used to decode the conceptual category (animate or inanimate), even for the unrecognizable scrambled objects. Animacy decoding for the scrambled objects, however, was only possible at the slowest periodic presentation rate. Animacy decoding for intact objects was faster, more robust, and could be achieved at faster presentation rates. Our results confirm that the mid-level visual features preserved in the scrambled objects contribute to animacy decoding, but also demonstrate that the dynamics vary markedly for intact versus scrambled objects. Our findings suggest a complex interplay between visual feature coding and categorical representations that is mediated by the visual system's capacity to use image features to resolve a recognisable object.
Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31400529     DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.116083

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neuroimage        ISSN: 1053-8119            Impact factor:   6.556


  9 in total

1.  Mid-level Feature Differences Support Early Animacy and Object Size Distinctions: Evidence from Electroencephalography Decoding.

Authors:  Ruosi Wang; Daniel Janini; Talia Konkle
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2022-08-01       Impact factor: 3.420

2.  The nature of neural object representations during dynamic occlusion.

Authors:  Lina Teichmann; Denise Moerel; Anina N Rich; Chris I Baker
Journal:  Cortex       Date:  2022-04-26       Impact factor: 4.644

3.  Using High-Density Electroencephalography to Explore Spatiotemporal Representations of Object Categories in Visual Cortex.

Authors:  Gennadiy Gurariy; Ryan E B Mruczek; Jacqueline C Snow; Gideon P Caplovitz
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2022-05-02       Impact factor: 3.420

4.  Unraveling the Neural Mechanisms Which Encode Rapid Streams of Visual Input.

Authors:  William Turner
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2022-02-16       Impact factor: 6.709

5.  Separability and geometry of object manifolds in deep neural networks.

Authors:  Uri Cohen; SueYeon Chung; Daniel D Lee; Haim Sompolinsky
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2020-02-06       Impact factor: 14.919

6.  Human EEG recordings for 1,854 concepts presented in rapid serial visual presentation streams.

Authors:  Tijl Grootswagers; Ivy Zhou; Amanda K Robinson; Martin N Hebart; Thomas A Carlson
Journal:  Sci Data       Date:  2022-01-10       Impact factor: 6.444

7.  Exploring the Representations of Individual Entities in the Brain Combining EEG and Distributional Semantics.

Authors:  Andrea Bruera; Massimo Poesio
Journal:  Front Artif Intell       Date:  2022-02-23

8.  The time-course of feature-based attention effects dissociated from temporal expectation and target-related processes.

Authors:  Thomas A Carlson; Anina N Rich; Denise Moerel; Tijl Grootswagers; Amanda K Robinson; Sophia M Shatek; Alexandra Woolgar
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-04-28       Impact factor: 4.996

9.  Overfitting the Literature to One Set of Stimuli and Data.

Authors:  Tijl Grootswagers; Amanda K Robinson
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2021-07-08       Impact factor: 3.169

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.